The Advertising Standards Authority has told Apple UK not to show an advert which suggested the iPhone contained "all parts of the internet" any more.
The iPhone cannot access websites which use Java or Flash despite its claim that "all parts of the internet are on the iPhone". Two members of the public complained about the TV …

COMMENTS

Page:

Give me strength

Wow 2 people complained........no one in their right mind believes what advertises tell them, they are paid to sprout complete bo11ox5. Who believes that if you don't have BT broadband your relationship will breakdown because your using non BT broadband? I might as well go trip in the foyer and make a claim whilst phoning Ocean finance to sort out my finances.

Surely more people complained about that loan company advert with the retard wanting to watch the footie or the geordie "Josh, Daddys found your scooter"

lolwhut?

"cannot access websites which use Java or Flash"

Seriously? I mean... seriously? Once again a phone tries to get above it's station. So it was too hard to get it working J2ME? I may be missing something here isn't that fairly standard on mobiles these days (and for years)? Well done Apple, proving yet again why MS are so dominant. btw, I'm not an MS fan or anything, just saying.

Apple lying *shock*

Obvious

This was obvious right from the start. As much as some of us hate flash or how much of a drain it is on battery life it is a big part of the internet and Apple can't ignore it. This can only help Apple in so much as people's expectations should be biased on truthful advertising now.

Apple Story Overload

Of the top 18 articles on the site at the moment (by order on screen) 6 are Apple related. I know your a little less blinded by Apple's supposed wonder than most tech sites so at least they aren't all blind fanboyism, but I really don't have that much interest in Apple products.

I hope I'm not the only reader of this 'tech news' site who doesn't want to know every little happening within the 'Job's reality distortion field'.

WTF?

all parts?

so not even all parts of the web then. The "internet" is a big place with lots of protocols (http, ftp, telnet, gopher, smtp etc.. etc...) and types of server software (tor, counterstrike ;), torrent - blah blah...etc... ) ...so it's a much bigger lie than the ASA acknowledge.

Yet they allow ISPs to keep asvertising 'Unlimited' broadband...

Crazy

In the full adjudication, it says:

"Clearcast said, in order to assess the claims, they saw a demonstration of the iPhone and in particular the internet functionality. They said a number of websites were chosen at random and they appeared to work as described in the ad. They said, on the basis of the demonstration and the advertiser's assurances, they were content to approve the claims relating to access to the internet."

So, even after a demonstration of the iPhone's internet functionality, where they concluded it accessed the internet as described in the ad - the ASA still upheld the complaint...?! What are they on?

Since when did proprietary technologies used on a minority of sites, become synonymous with the open standards based 'internet' as a whole?

I don't hear people complaining they can't access "all parts of the internet" on PCs without Flash or Java...

Re:My previous post..

But .....

Java has now been released under the GPL, and there are efforts towards a GPL Flash player alternative (Gnash) which is known to work with YouTube. And there are instructions to create homebrew iPhone applications.

So surely someone could cross-compile GPL Java and Gnash, and install the resulting binaries on an iPhone?

Bluetooth?

I was told my iPhone would support Bluetooth standards - it duzzent.

But in the case of this advert, I support Apple. Safari supports web compatibility standards admirably. By including Java and Flash as 'standards' on the internet, we are opening publishers up to the possibility of providing sites that ONLY work with these technologies. Do you really want to come to The Register and find you can only view the front page in a whizzy Flash format, and only comment once you've logged in with a Java applet? Uuurgh.

Javascript

Whilst I agree about the whole Flash thing (never seen the point, annoys the crap out of me and crashes the version of IE I'm forced to use at work) I think you'll find every Internet Banking site in existence uses Javascript.

So do all those wonderful people above, who claim Javascript should be bannished to hell because it is not a "standard", do all their banking in the high street or are we just dealing with the usual bunch of blinkered ass-holes who like jumping on band wagons and high-horses because it's "cool"?

Incidentally, I hate Javascript. But that's because I have to write Internet Banking systems using it and Firefox and Internet Explorer have a rather fundamental disagreement concerning what bits of Javascript should be implemented and it makes my life hell.

Yet....

If I complain about the blatant miss-advertising of internet services to the ASA, they don't want to know. They've refused to uphold any complaints regarding "Unlimited Broadband" when clearly it's not "unlimited", and (apparently) not misleading either!?

I really can't see why this complaint would be upheld when other more serious and wide reaching ones aren't.

I can only presume poor old Apple forgot to pay the appropriate iBung & the ISP's didn't.

But seriously,

It can't multi-task, it can't copy & paste, it can't take video, it can't mms, it can't be used as a modem with your laptop, it can't do bluetooth properly, it has limited browsing ability... Why can't the sodding thing just politely assume its correct niche in the market; that is, a very nice mid-range proprietary feature phone that runs limited proprietary applications (but not j2me, like the rest of the world). Why this evangelical insistence that it's something more than that?

RE: all parts? el al.

Indeed, it really winds me up when people talk about "The internet" and mean "The Web", or whatever. I can forgive the APs, but anyone associated with technology should know that "The Internet" is far more than a few websites.

web n00bs

For the web n00bs, who are happy to post in comments on el Reg :), have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocols and look at the Application layer protocols ;) There's more than just HTTP (and what gets me is the majority of you use POP3 every single day...sigh)

It doesn't support ActiveX? Thankgod!

There's a lot of FUD going on here.

The ASA's flagrant misunderstanding of W3C standards notwithstanding, the lack of Adobe Flash -- Apple don't get to produce their own version without being sued -- and Java are hardly showstoppers.

The lack of Java is, frankly, no great loss. It serves little purpose other than to annoy and it has so many "standards" of its own that complaining that a phone doesn't run one of them is hypocritical to say the least: which version of Java would you like it to have? J2ME? J2EE? (The iPhone runs on OS X, not Symbian or WM6.) How about one of the umpteen variants that still exist on embedded platforms? Or perhaps one or two of the older JVMs that are still installed by default on desktops?

Would the real "Java" PLEASE stand up!

@James Bassett: Javascript (officially known "ECMAScript") *is* supported on iPhone. Javascript has nothing to do with Java other than looking a bit like it at times if you squint your eyes a little and view it from a distance.

As for accessing the whole Internet: yes it can.

Just because you don't get FTP, WebDAV and other Internet apps supplied by default, it doesn't mean they can't be written. There's a full, proper OS in there with a *complete* TCP/IP stack. None of it is limited and there are plenty of third-party apps that let you do whatever you want. The only reason you can't run VOIP apps on it (in certain territories) is because Apple won't put them on its App Store, not because the iPhone can't handle it.

@James Bassett

Javascript != Java Applet

The end. Twat. Were you the judge in this case? 'Cause clearly he is a twat as well. Techinically, you _can_ reach all parts of the Internet (or at least all parts of the web, but anyone who knows the difference wouldn't pay any attention to this claim) it merely chooses not to display them quite the way that the auther intended. A bit like people visiting with Internet Exploder...

Have a break...

"You can't multi-task, you can't copy & paste! You can't take video! You can't MMS! You can't be used as a modem with your laptop! You can't do Bluetooth properly! You have negligibly limited web-browsing features!"

[Unwraps Kit-Kat and eats it...]

"You'll go a long way!"

(For the young 'uns, here's the original 1980s ad: http://video.aol.com/video-detail/kitkat-1980-s-retro-advert/1332649792)

@James Bassett

I am one of the people who thing the world would be a better place without javascript. I know, the article was about Java and Flash not Javascript. Very occasionally there is a good reason for some noncompulsory javascript. I have ye to see a reason for Flash and Java.

I do not use internet banking at all, so I do walk into my nearest branches when necessary. I have heard good things about the HSBC web site, but not enough to get me to try it.

It would be nice to send gpg signed emails instead of cheques. It would be nice to receive gpg encrypted statements signed by my bank - if they gave a real commitment not to use my email address for junk mail.

A browser is too big and complicated to trust with my investments. I might be tempted if the site worked with lynx.

Unfortunately using gpg securely requires a tiny bit of effort on the part of the customer, so 99% of them will never be able to handle it. How much am I paying so the banks can fart about with flashy web pages that encourage users to use security flawed software?